So the Pentagon has its "message force multipliers" - retired generals (a/k/a "sneaky old guys"), many with defense industry ties, posing as impartial analysts on cable and broadcast news networks to beat the drums of war. The major media seem to be fine with the arrangement, happy to dispense government propanda from sources with serious conflicts of interest.
How to fight back against this military-industrial-media complex?
Initially from the outside ... and eventually from the inside.
From the outside: In terms of talent, creativity and media savviness, progressives have a clear advantage. Some fine examples are on display right now at MoveOn's Obama in 30 Seconds contest now underway (shameless plug for my own modest entry, We're the Deciders!).
So with nothing more than the promise that MoveOn will purchase airtime for a single winning ad, devoted amateurs and professionals produced over 1100 ads in support of Obama's message. "Change we can believe in" multiplied by 10 to the third power.
Chances are that many entries will live beyond the life of the contest, thanks to YouTube and the like. Some of the best - or most provocative - could gain enough momentum to get noticed by the TeeVee folks, who are suckers for free video.
Where do we go from here? We've already come a long way since the time in January 2003 when I was part of a small group of peace activists from New Jersey who made a few ripples by creating an antiwar ad and buying time to air it on CNN in Washington the night of Bush's State of the Union address (censored by cable operator Comcast before airtime). The censorship became the story, and generated far more free press and airtime than we could have purchased with a few thousand dollars in donations.
But it would help to have more than the occasional contest from MoveOn and the ability to post pro-bono work on YouTube. Any ideas for funding work like this on a more frequent basis? Even creative folks gotta eat.
From the inside: Even though the news networks are mostly run by a bunch of older boomers who've sold out, they run on the sweat and creative juice of twenty and thirty-somethings. Eventually, this new generation will rise in the ranks - and have more influence over what messages dominate the programming. Could that eventually move the message to the left?
Or will 24-hour cable news nets go the way of broadcast TV news and simply fade into irrelevance ... as younger generations get more and more of their news from online sources (and will these newer sources be inherently more progressive-friendly)?